On Mar 23, 2010, at 7:09 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Augie Fackler <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mar 23, 2010, at 7:38 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Peter Hosey <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Mar 23, 2010, at 02:39:38, Felipe Contreras wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, replying to Stephen Holt; there's only one feature the stock prpl >>>>> has that msn-pecan doesn't have: support for yahoo contacts. However _no >>>>> one_ has ever asked for that feature. >>>> >>>> Maybe not of you, but quite a few of our users have requested it of us. >>> >>> Do you have numbers of how many people requested that feature vs >>> direct file transfers? We do: >>> http://code.google.com/p/msn-pecan/issues/list?can=1 >> >> That's still a regression, and a sizable one at that. > > Sizable? That's debatable. > > Besides, I have provided crystal-clear numbers that show that > end-users don't care about that, or at least, they care *way* more > about fast file transfers.
*Your* users[0] don't care. Ours very well might. In fact, a cursory search of our trac suggests that we have active users depending on MSN <-> Yahoo support and filing bugs about it, so a regression like that would probably make a number of them pretty upset. Your users probably tend to be the more savvy end of the crowd. Many low-end users never need file transfers and just use email anyway. [0] In fact, your users that are able to properly triage a bug into the msn-pecan issue tracker, which implies an even higher level of sophistication than picking msn-pecan over the default prpl in the first place. > > -- > Felipe Contreras
